Vanessa Kharbudon
“It is necessary to emphasize that this piece is neither intended to pour venom on menfolk nor is it an oestrogen jamboree, but a hope that blind eyes will open and SEE”.
Crimes against women have never ever been a new phenomenon that we see only in this 21st century. It might seem so because it is being reported in the many avenues of media available today; additionally education has opened people’s eyes to gender violence and such dust is being swept from the familial or clan carpet out into the open.
A very offensive example of gender violence is how female rape survivors are treated. The abysmal rate of arrest and conviction is demoralizing. Let us not forget the inconsiderate suggestions made by various national and regional leaders about dress codes, makeup and women’s reputations. Examples abound where two of our high-ranking politicians have in effect, suggested that women who are raped or have consensual sex outside of wedlock should be hanged. In the same context, consider Abu Azmi’s (Samajwadi Party leader) shocker, ‘Rape is punishable by hanging…the woman is guilty. Any woman if, whether married or unmarried, goes along with a man, with or without her consent, should be hanged. It shouldn’t be allowed even if a woman goes by consent.’ [http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/abu-azmi-shocker-on-yadavs-rape-remark-women-having-sex-should-be-hanged/1/355087.html] Mulayam Singh Yadav declared that men who were convicted of rape should be forgiven as boys will be boys. The Jamaat-e-Islami Hind sent its suggestions to the Justice J.S. Verma Committee (set up to review anti-rape law in the country). One of its suggestions includes, ‘Co-Education should be abolished and proper education facilities meant for only women only should be available at all levels of education’. Another point, ‘educational institutions should prescribe sober and dignified dress for girls’. Note the restrictions and finger pointing on women in the statements.
Closer home, the conversations in our homesteads is just as prejudiced as vicious whispers of ‘she asked for it’ (Who asks for rape?!); ‘what was she doing out at that time of the night’? (As if rape occurs only at night); ‘just look at her short dress’ and such nonsense is tossed about with zero empathy for the pain and trauma of victims. A victim’s character is tarred with a promiscuous brush (read character assassination). Promiscuity should not even be an issue in a crime such as rape. In the case of a two year old victim, how does the licentiousness angle apply then? It is a known fact that a predator preys on those weaker than him/her. One cannot attack someone stronger. Imagine with me for a moment, if the victim brandishes a 9mm or a.44 Magnum, would the rapist continue with the crime? He certainly won’t because self-preservation trumps pulling down his pants anytime. The chauvinistic argument about the woman being the tempter to rapists, who cannot help themselves is unacceptable, obnoxious and indefensible.
Rape is about power – perverted twisted sense of power the perpetrator feels over the victim. Rape is about silencing and punishing the person who is seen as deviating from the status quo, especially retarded chauvinists who want to teach the ‘erring’ female a lesson, thus keeping her in her place.
It only gets worse when it comes to the brutality and intensity of sexual violence against women. Consider rape as a weapon of war. It is a subject that the state tiptoes around lest it offends those in uniform who go on a rampage pillaging women’s bodies and souls. In this sickening scenario, it is the ‘occupiers’ who display their strength and power over the ‘defeated’ by ‘branding’ the womenfolk in that occupied territory.
Let us deliberate that in some LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) cases, rape is viewed as an act of ‘re-ordering’ or ‘reinforcing’ as a means to coerce them into toeing the line of what is deemed ‘normal’ in society.
Reflect on the varied solutions to curb rape. The so called resolutions focus on women changing their behavior and lifestyle. The imposition of dress codes takes the cake. How the salwar kameez, hijab, tapmohkhlieh or neck to toe shapeless ugly dress can halt rape is beyond comprehension. These pathetic solutions point to the victim. In the case of a murder, would such inane solutions be bandied about? The murderer is taken into custody and dealt with. Similarly, the rapist – be it juvenile or adult – should be treated as a criminal. If one can commit the adult act of rape, then he cannot be treated as a child (Gag yourself with a spoon if you’re going to defend a ‘child rapist’). Imagine the pain of reliving that act of violence, then being hung out to dry by the justice system and the society. Keep in mind the trauma of having to live with it, not minimizing at all the mental and psychological ramifications of a rape survivor. The rapist is a murderer who kills the victim slowly on the inside – he is killing again and again.
An extremely annoying solution to stop rape is for women to cease ‘roaming’ beyond a particular time (I see a crooked gnarled finger pointing to women…again!). Some dim bulb came up with the idea of solving rape by curfew timings! This is another stab on a woman’s right to movement and her freedom. Why should women hide behind the bars of their houses for protection while men gallivant wherever they please? When any attempt is made to curtail a woman’s freedom, this cannot fall under the gambit of curbing crimes against women.
Another concern is that of marital rape. Marriage is not legalized rape. The marriage license is not for sexual abuse where husbands demand whatever they want from wives. A wife has the right to refuse what she feels uneasy with. Even making her feel unwanted, unattractive and ugly if she does not acquiesce to his sexual deviancies is rape of her self-esteem cum inner self. How many wives are silently suffering in this area because they do not want any trouble with the self-proclaimed lord of the manor, thereby gritting their teeth when the act takes place? How many dread the sound of their husbands’ footsteps? How many wives become bitter, eventually stone cold and die a thousand deaths because of their husbands’ cruelty? Matrilineal hogwash!
A woman has the right to choose who she wants intimacy with. She has the absolute right to say ‘haoid’ (yes) and ‘em’ (no). She can also change her mind half-way and say ‘na’ (no). Rape is a violation of her free will where somebody else forces his will upon her.
It is the duty of the state to tackle crime and protect its citizens. Are women not citizens? It is extremely disturbing to see the A, B…Z category overindulgence called security given to our politicians when the security of women is more at stake than any of these netas who suffer from an acute case of megalomania. The state is more anxious with minting more cash to go on foreign jaunts rather than seeking speedy justice for rape survivors. The dire need is prompt justice. Justice delayed is injustice. Are lawyers so dehumanized that they have no qualms bearing the flag of injustice? It is a repugnant skill that this community of black crows has acquired in delaying the protocols needed for prompt justice. It is a scary reality when parents wonder if it is a safe world for their little girl to play with her male cousins in her own house; when even in school and tuition environs, porn addicts who need to seek help lurk around instead; when husbands abuse their wives in secret and don a ‘decent good’ mask in public.
Why is the state going at a snail’s pace when it comes to prosecuting rapists and molesters? When the predator is a megalomaniac politician, a perverted affluent businessman, a debauched priest or clergy, or worse, a deranged father, then things get hushed up, papers ‘misplaced’ and the law department suddenly suffers from chronic amnesia. Let’s not go into denial at this point. Why is it that in our society issues cannot be discussed openly and objectively? Why can’t the rights and opinions of others – even of adult children, be respected?
Another retarded attitude in our society is the use of the term ‘awria’ (promiscuity). I am becoming allergic to this word because it is thrown around to debase women. This word has become a tool in the smear campaign of tainting women who are perceived as deviating from the ‘normal’ (a word which I hate) standards of what a woman should and should not be. It is used as a bullet intended to maim another woman’s reputation because she does not toe the line of antediluvian definitions shackling womanhood. I hear it repetitively in pastor’s sermons, religious discourses by priests, maulvis and mullahs from other religions, in workplaces and in our homesteads. What kind of hypocrisy and double standards are we promoting when men can do the ‘booze and sex’ lifestyle but a woman is told from the time she gets her period that she should latch on to her virginity lest she fails to ‘catch’ a ‘good decent man’ (Note: this extreme unhealthy obsession with virginity). It is high time that these ‘decent good men’ also be subjected to the same scrutiny and interrogation a woman is. Alas! Even the term period is mentioned in such subtle barely detectable whispers as to cause the hearers to wonder if they have suddenly gone deaf. If a woman is to be condemned to the gallows for being ‘awria’ then the same standard should be applied to a man as well. Consider how we inconsiderately malign a woman for her relationship choices, for posting pictures of herself on Facebook and for creating videos (whether objectionable or not is debatable), but the man in those relationships, pictures and videos is strangely obscured? The woman is thrown under the bus and even threatened with violence and barbarism and for what? For making her own decisions like any man in those situations does? If legal action is to be taken, then both men and women should face the consequences of their actions in face of the law of the land as found in the Constitution, not in some insane quasi court based on archaic and biased customs which is always skewed against women.
‘Ka kynthei ba tip sngi kadei ban poi ïng haka por kaba biang’ (A good woman should reach home at the proper time). Here’s another extremely irritating one: ‘Ki kynthei ba don burom kidei ban riam don akor’ (A decent woman should dress accordingly). I want to pose to you readers and the society at large a question: Who decides what is the ‘decent’ timing, dress, mannerism, et al for an adult? If we treat a woman differently from a man, then we should cease at once from calling ourselves a democracy. In a democracy, a woman is regarded at par with a man. If men and women are not equal, then we need to stop this pretense of egalitarianism and just come out and state in the open that women are an inferior species, sub-standard to the all superior male who can do whatever he wants; a weak little female who has to serve the testosterone king as she becomes useful only in the bedroom and in the baby making and rearing factory. How about enshrining it in black and white that women are useful for one thing only? Therefore they are commodity to be displayed on the shelf and taken out only when it is time for use. Therefore, a woman is a use and throw property. By the way, we will need irrefutable statistics for this.
Please stop pronouncing that rape was born in the laps of ‘indecent immoral’ women who dress provocatively to trap poor weak males in the dating field. What is considered ‘provocative’ is actually a state of the mind. I might disagree with what you term provocative, but does that mean disagreement should amount to rape? Reflect on the sad reality that in some countries a woman without the burkha is labelled immoral or provoking men’s lusts. In other nations, women have the freedom to don bikinis on the beach. Now, who is right and who is wrong? Who gets to decide? Why should anybody decide for that matter? Closer home for instance, I have heard so many Khasis self-righteously holler that they would never drape themselves in the tummy-bra-baring sari when this is supposed to be the national attire! Fashion choices are personal matters. It is very superficial, stupid and gossipy of a society to be all hot and bothered about what a person wears. Don’t you all have more profitable and worthwhile subjects to delve into?
It is high time for society to teach men not to rape. It is crucial for men to take back that mantle of honour and chivalry that is lying dusty and rusty in the dungeon somewhere. Please refrain from crudely stating that a ‘loose’ or ‘leh tad dor ’ woman deserves to be violated. By making such vulgar proclamations, you think you are civilized? Please consider that your idea of ‘leh tad dor’ is not one that all of humanity agrees with. ‘No’ means just that – ‘NO’. In addition, when a woman changes her mind, respect her decision. What part of mutual consent don’t you understand?
Mothers, kindly teach your sons the value of womanhood and how to treat a woman as your son will one day marry and live with one – not you. Fathers, please demonstrate to your sons the meaning of honour and chivalry. Gentlemanliness is not summed up in dress trousers and shirts with sleek short hair. It certainly is not in skillfully intoning the English language. If that is what you think it is, then it is very shallow of you.
Men, your physical strength is given you to defend, protect and stand up for freedom, equality and fraternity. Why would you not stand against and fight human slavery, poverty, injustice? Your strength was given for a reason. Use it for the good of humanity. Don’t you want this world to be a safer place?
My parting words: A real man does not rape – he has no desire at all to use his brute force upon an unwilling woman.